why is everyone taking about how marvelous this 2 second thing is and how it has better script and better actors than the dark knight but seriously how is this better than the dark knight im baffld
shareThey're jokes Sherlock.
shareyes, we are very very stupid.
shareStupid or not, it was a great movie.
shareIf you think the dark knight is better than this then you have no taste
shareJoke's on you, you can't even spell you correctly, you you.
shareWhat's really stupid is that the actors in the Dark Knight didn't watch RGS to learn how to saunter properly.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I'm doing God's work... because the bastard's too lazy to do it himself.
Well, that's a loaded question. Rather than claiming that one is better than the other, I would prefer to recognize their interdependent nature. TDK is of course a postmodern pastiche of RGS (cf. video short "Sources of Inspiration" on the Blu-Ray special edition of TDK), so by all accounts TDK could not possibly exist without RGS. Does that make the original a better film? Of course not--that would be like saying that Shakespeare's Hamlet was inferior to the Saxo Grammaticus source that inspired the Bard simply because it came later. Christopher Nolan used the source material to achieve many nuanced effects that are simply not handled as complexly in TDK. Take the man in the tan trenchcoat and hat who walks away from the camera and then turns sharply to the left in RGS. Le Prince as director conveys all the determination, energy, and strength that is necessary for the character. The performance works. It may not be awards-worthy, but we have no doubts as to the psychological depth of that character. Then consider that scene's analogue in TDK, the part early in the film when Batman confronts the Batman-impostors in the parking garage. The scene is almost shot-for-shot identical, yet Nolan somehow manages to evoke a sense of self-doubt and melancholic despair that sits uneasily yet realistically alongside those same feelings of determination, energy, and strength. It's a psychological depth that's exponentially more profound. I could detail all the other comparisons, but that would perhaps be obvious and tedious, so I'll let that one example suffice.
On the other hand, I'd hesitate to say that TDK, for all its added complexity, is a better film than RGS. This is a more subjective point to argue, but the poetic framing of RGS simply evokes a feeling that TDK never manages to achieve. It's like an extended prose-poem on the theme of life, condensed into the affective sublimity of a haiku. It's all the beauty of Malick's The Tree of Life condensed into three seconds. I mean, seriously--the way the man in black's shadow passes over the dress of the woman in the feathered hat? Have you ever seen anything in the past 125 years as blithely devastating as that?
[deleted]